Considering that I believe the Earth is a globe, that website which I linked contains accurate paths of past eclipses, and paths of future eclipses. I've witnessed a number of eclipses which have crossed my path in the past and have matched to the minute the times and locations stated on the site. That is evidence.

As to the 3D animation, I'm glad you can see the obvious. It's not a geometric model of the Sun-Earth-Moon system. It's an animation of the Earth, and the path the eclipse takes. And look, it's a wavy line. It's okay, Tom.

The 2017 total solar eclipse is not a perfect arc. And most eclipses you look at aren't perfect arcs either. Look at future eclipses around the poles (well... North Pole) and you'll notice that it they aren't perfect arcs. The future eclipse spherical showed wasn't a perfect arc either. It was in the shape of a hill.

What are you talking about? On Flat Earth maps the paths are perfect arcs. They are distorted on other types of maps because they are not correct.

Here is Oppolzer's map for 2010-2028. The 2017 eclipse is a perfect arc on this map.

I was talking about the globe model.

"We are not here to directly persuade anyone [...] You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."-Pete Svarrior

"We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"-Tom Bishop

============================================================Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

Surely, if I walk in a circle on level ground, my path will look different depending on whether you look at it from above, or from on the ground, to the side of it ....

And, to go back to the first page, it's not a perfect arc when viewed from above the point of max, because the Moon's trajectory is not aligned perfectly with Earth's orbital path, and the rotation of the Earth is not aligned perfectly with the Moon's path. This should be self-evident from my link above.

« Last Edit: May 16, 2019, 07:42:41 AM by Tumeni »

============================================================Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

No, Tom. On a globe Earth the paths are not perfect arcs because there are two independent movements involved: the Earth's rotation on its axis, and the moon's orbit around the Earth.

Both of those movements are constant, not erratic.

.. but they're not aligned with each other. And the surface of the Earth under the shadow, were the Earth to remain stationary, would describe a partial semi-circle, aligned with the Moon's movement.

============================================================Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

A question regarding Oppolzer's map, Tom. Is this the flat earth map you believe is accurate in the layout and size of its land masses? You are referencing his map for these paths as being accurate for a flat earth.

That is not a flat earth map. That is a representation of the earth on a map that only shows "...the earth north of the south temperate zone."

And as also shown by Stack, Oppolzer created a second map representing the earth south of the south temperate zone. Both are merely projections. Give it up, Tom. You and the Wiki entry are presenting a falsehood of someone else's work.

Also, the text that the Wiki cites that cites Oppolzer believes the earth is round. Just read the rest of the text. Oppolzer was not a flat earther. His map is not a map of a flat earth. It is a projection of a section of a round earth.

Thats besides the point. Its not a map of a flat earth! Therefore you cannot claim anything about it being true for a flat earth - just because you like the paths to be in perfect arcs, does not make an argument true for the earth being flat.

Okay. Tell us why the Northern centered map has the eclipses in perfect arcs, as opposed to the globe map or any projection layout.

Tell us why you would accept any FE idea that is using a map when you have said numerous times that no FE map exists? Surely you must be skeptical of this model since you freely admit that distances between locations on Earth are unknown? It would be a remarkable coincidence that this produced perfect arcs, as you say, by accident.

Wow... the Oppolzer northern hemisphere 1900-1918 eclipses map posted on FE wiki Eclipses, as a reference to promote FE, had a hidden twin map for the South Pole (Antarctic continent) as center. That is fantastic. So, FE now improved, it is double-sided. See how Australia's shape is more real. I wonder which way UA pushes it.

Calculating here how Sun and Moon, both at 4800km altitude and 48km in diameter could promote the strange total eclipse path on 11/13/2012, changing more than 30° of latitude in a matter of few hours, considering only a small 12° of circling difference (longitude) between Sun and Moon in 24 hours See, same altitude, can only promote a straight down vertical shadow, total or partial, never angled. July/22/2028 will have more than 40 degrees of latitude change. FE behavior is amazing. Someone may say the Moon is way down below the Sun, with a chaotic circling path (we don't observe that in the real world), but both Sun and Moon being 48km in diameter the projected umbra shadow will never be wider then 48km, the minimum noted all times was never smaller than 120km.

A lot of things don't add up. FErs scientists and high knowledge specialists need urgent to define and post the right numbers.